Global Warming Issue: NASA/GISS Data Incorrect


Pundits, politicians and the media thought they had a reputable entity to back up their global warming diatribe – NASA. Michael Fumento states in his article Global Warming and James Hansen’s Hacks in which he tells readers that we should look more closely …

In retrospect, you knew there would be trouble when you put the people responsible for the Space Shuttle program in charge of tracking U.S. temperatures. So perhaps it shouldn’t have come as a big surprise when it was revealed that NASA committed a bit of an oopsie regarding data constantly used by the mainstream media and other global warming proponents. If you follow the global warming debate, you “know” that nine of the ten warmest years recorded in the U.S. lower 48 since 1880 have occurred since 1995, with the very hottest being 1998. But whaddya know! Those figures are wrong. Data from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) now show the hottest year since 1880 was 1934. …Indeed, four of the 10 hottest years were in the 1930s, while only three were in the past decade. The real 15 hottest years are spread over seven decades. …

Rush Limbaugh was incorrect in saying the new figures are “just more evidence” that “this whole global warming thing is a scientific hoax.” Conversely, global warming hotheads are also wrong in insisting the revelation belongs in a game of Trivial Pursuit.

The GISS, which is directed by global warming guru James Hansen, is saying likewise. … the GISS ignores the tremendous emotional impact it’s had in practically claiming each year is hotter than the one before. …


But, notes Canadian mathematician Stephen McIntyre, who exposed the false figures, “The Hansen error … has a significant impact on the GISS estimate of U.S. temperature history … Is this important because we’re a major world power or that we produce the best fried chicken? No, it’s important because we have a far more sophisticated system of temperature monitoring than countries with far larger land masses. Hence, data from each of these nations affect the global model more than the American data. 

“Many of the stations in ChinaIndonesiaBrazil, and elsewhere are in urban areas,” observes McIntyre. This can produce hotter temperatures, yet some of the major trackers of the data from these countries, including the National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration, make no attempt to adjust for monitor placement errors. …

Thus if the U.S. model, by far the most accurate one, became the model it would be a gut punch to those claiming we must take drastic, horrifically expense measures right now to ameliorate warming. Therefore, for the GISS to say this “only” affects the U.S. data is rather like a used car salesman insisting, “This automobile defect is trivial; it only affects steering and braking.” …

McIntyre discovered an error in GISS records for the years 2000 through 2006. In simplest terms, they hadn’t been adjusted to compensate for the location or time of day where the data was gathered. Nobody at GISS ever correlated those newer figures with the older ones until McIntyre did, even though later Hansen admitted it was “easy to fix.” McIntyre published the data on his own website and got the agency to admit it was wrong and post new figures.

Yet the GISS did absolutely nothing to alert scientists or the public to the new figures. This though it has published five global warming press releases so far this year, each one alarming. It took the blogosphere and radio talk show hosts to publicize the new figures even as the mainstream media initially ignored it.

Ultimately the greatest importance of all of this is that it strongly appears to substantiate the intuitive belief that, with scientist-politician Hansen at the helm the GISS, whose data are far more important to modeling global temperatures – and hence global warming policy – that it lets on, is not a neutral collector and disseminator of statistics but rather a politicized mouthpiece.


And that is the gist of it, isn’t it. Politicians are willing to allow junk scientists and their false science persuades the American people and the people of other nations to pay the heavy price (their tax funds) of their false science, when such funding could be used for other things.
I am not denying that there are changing patterns in climate; this has been going on for as long as Earth’s history. And during that history there have been major changes – over longer periods of time that what the politocrat-scientists claim. Looking at the studies of CO2 and examining the climate during the period when dinosaurs roamed the Earth – is global warming so bad? Plant life was prolific, and had to be to feed the huge plant eaters that roamed at the time. Of course, there were violent changes and weather patterns then as well – some being catastrophic volcanic activity. Many ships of the seas went down in violent storms during hurricane season in the Caribbean Sea off the coast of the newly found Americas. Was that global warming? In fact, records show that during the medieval age there was a warming in Europe. The ice caps were in place then and they no doubt would have seen massive ice pieces the size of a small country drifting away from the massive ice shelf to turn into icebergs and eventually move to warmer seas where they melted – with no perceptible notice of any change to coastlines. However, there were changes in coastlines, some of it caused by the force of the tide and other reasons because of the slow process of land silting – the opposite effect of what “experts” say will happen to our blue planet. The historic city of Ephesus has a dock that sits on dry land with the sea almost two kilometers away – because of silting. In other areas along the Mediterranean Sea there are ruins of Roman towns that once were on dry land under the sea along the coastline.
Maybe, in the future, the arctic ice will melt away revealing the land mass that was once there before it became buried under miles of ice and snow, as it was revealed by Peri Reis’smap. And not many have considered that it is the Earth’s sun, a star, is the cause of these fluctuations in climate involving the sun’s influence. It is an astronomically scientific fact that the sun, a star, will end up burning up eons from now. Is this a human factor is it just the natural way of the universe?
Yes, we need to use logical conservation and keep our world as ecologically balanced as possible, but we need to laugh the politically motivated scientists off the stage, those who come up with “theories” that are presented as facts, and those who would use the media and other informational sources to make the public believe that their falsely based “data” requires spending and using human resources for an endeavor that is not as important as other issues on the table.
And, when all is said and done – If the climate is truly changing so drastically – What in the name of science could anyone do about it? The data shows nothing in terms of human interference in climate, nor does it show that we should do anything more than plan on a possibility of our coastlines to change. They have been changing all along anyway.
It’s time to laugh the clowns off the stage before this nonsense becomes US policy, much like the European nations have fallen under the sway of junk scientists, and before we allow our governments to waste more tax dollars on politically motivated alarmism.
Note: Also see Randy Hall‘s article that explains the situation and that the facts are being ignored at CNSNews.com.

Advertisements